Scope's reply to the governments planned concessions to the green paper.

This has just been published, but needs to be read in conjunction with the original Bill:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0267/amend/universal_rm_cwh_0702.pdf

the original Bill:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0267/240267.pdf

this amendment reads:

Page 4, line 22, leave out Clause 5

Member's explanatory statement
This amendment leaves out the personal independence payment clause.

Clause 5, page 5, line 18, at end insert “but no day may be appointed until the conditions in section [Pre-commencement requirements] have been met.”

In the original Bill this read:

(2) Subsection (1) comes into force on such day as the Secretary of State may by regulations made by statutory instrument appoint.

I'm just a bit puzzled by the 'Pre-commencement requirements', when it also says leave out Clause 5.

Same as fatigue. For me fatigue is the most debilitating symptom. You can’t run a car without petrol

Hi @secretsquirrel1 - I've just found the transcript of yesterday's debate:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-07-01/debates/56F2EF7B-404B-44D4-865E-EA09FCD92EA4/details

Tom Morrison said,

''………many of my constituents have raised their fears, worries and anxieties about these plans. As they have been unable to provide their own stories directly because of the Government’s lack of consultation, I want to use my time to be their voice. Amy from Bramhall suffers from ME, and her illness can fluctuate hour to hour and day to day, making it hard to pass assessments for support. Amy recently appealed to me for assistance after the DWP withdrew her PIP, despite the fact that her illness was getting worse. Amy said:

“It is astounding how I can be reduced to zero points from receiving higher levels for mobility and daily care when I have not been cured nor had any improvement in how my conditions affect my life. In 2018 when my PIP was downgraded, following appeal it was rewarded back to me. Yet, now, without improvements to how I am affected it has been completely stopped.”

Those who have had to face mandatory reconsideration will know the extent of the documents needed and the stress involved, but to cope with this when someone is ill and suffering every single day is simply not sustainable. Amy has been advised that the mandatory reconsideration will take 15 weeks, which is almost four months, so where will Amy get the support she needs during this wait? This situation highlights the barriers that people with chronic illnesses and disabilities face when trying to get support.''

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Before this Jim Shannon had said,

''I have been asked by representatives of people with Parkinson’s and multiple sclerosis to put this question to the Secretary of State, and I hope she will give me the answer. They are worried that people with these fluctuating conditions will be locked out of qualifying for the higher rate of the UC health element, as a functional limitation must “constantly” apply for a claimant to meet the severe conditions criteria. Will she commit to add an explicit reference to the Bill to ensure that those with fluctuating conditions such as Parkinson’s and MS are not locked out of the higher rate? It is really important for those people.''

Liz Kendall replied,

''The hon. Gentleman raises a very important point. Members have asked whether people with fluctuating conditions will meet the severe conditions criteria, which are for those with lifelong conditions that will never improve and mean they can never work. It is the case that, as someone’s condition progresses, if they change and meet those severe conditions criteria, they will be protected. One of the reasons for the Timms review, which I will come on to, is precisely to make sure this vital benefit recognises the impact of fluctuating conditions on people’s lives. That is crucial to make sure this benefit is fit for the future.''

Yeah good point , she would of been happy if they had gone through

It sounds like Liz kendall was acknowledging that some with 'fluctuating conditions' may be considered to fit the 'severe conditions' criteria. Fluctuating conditions definitely have to be taken into account with PIP, probably hence the mention of Timms review.

However, all assessments are on an individual basis, so a blanket statement doesn't guarantee that everyone with a fluctuating condition would be awarded PIP, or fit into the severe conditions criteria.